Date of the earliest Sanskrit inscription of Campa
By Dineshchandra Sircar
Summary
The earliest Sanskrit inscription of Campa remains debated, with scholars proposing dates ranging from the 2nd–3rd century A.D. to no earlier than the 4th century A.D. The Vo-canh inscription, assigned to the 2nd or 3rd century by some due to its ornate *Sardalavikridita* metre and "box-headed" script, faces criticism. Critics argue that Sanskrit was not yet popular in Indian courts before the Gupta epoch, with Prakrit dominating inscriptions until the 4th century. The Junagadh inscription of Saka Rudradaman (150 A.D.) and the Mathura Brahmi inscription of Sodisa (1st century A.D.) demonstrate rare early Sanskrit use but do not indicate a broader shift from Prakrit. Debates center on the "box-headed" script’s diffusion speed and the identification of Sri-Mara with Fan-She-man (2nd–3rd century A.D.), which some use to support an early date. However, the popularity of *varman* names in Far Eastern royal titles likely emerged later, post-4th century A.D., and the script’s rapid spread to Campa remains unproven. The *Vatsagulma* copper plate (4th century) and other evidence suggest Sanskrit’s rise in epigraphy aligns with broader cultural shifts, not earlier. Most scholars conclude the Vo-canh inscription is unlikely pre-4th century, given the lack of supporting doctrinal or linguistic evidence.
Conclusion
This study reaffirms the argument that the Vo-canh inscription, previously assigned to the 2nd or 3rd century A.D., likely belongs to the 4th century A.D., aligning with the gradual rise of Sanskrit in Indian epigraphy. The analysis challenges earlier assumptions by demonstrating that the use of classical Sanskrit and ornate metres in inscriptions remained rare in India before the Gupta period, with Prakrit dominating royal records. The evidence from the Junagadh inscription and the Mathura Brahmi inscription suggests that while Sanskrit was occasionally employed, its widespread adoption in epigraphy occurred later. The study underscores the significance of the Vo-canh inscription as a marker of Sanskrit's growing influence, particularly in Far Eastern contexts, rather than as proof of its early popularity in India. This conclusion highlights the inscription's role in tracing the geographical and temporal spread of Sanskrit, emphasizing its cultural and linguistic implications for understanding early Indian and Southeast Asian interactions.